Is pacquiao really 7 division champ

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

Decent with such a ****** human being as yourself? I repeat...gtfo idiot.

Also note that I did not say who the Cotto nuthugger was...you just admitted to it...

Ohhhhhhh men, the people with small penises!!!

[jdn]

Hatton and MAB was the man to beat at there respective weight class. Pac took care of both of them. The win would be greater then beating the paper champs so its easy for people to consider him a 7 weight division champion.

[aether]

Hatton and MAB was the man to beat at there respective weight class. Pac took care of both of them. The win would be greater then beating the paper champs so its easy for people to consider him a 7 weight division champion.

well, i rather people call him a "4 weight lineal champion" rather than a 7 weight champion, but i doubt casual fans understand the concept of lineal belts and alphabet belts.

belts don't really mean that much. its the fighters that make the belt, not the other way around.

[ummid]

none of this matters. to be a world champion of a division you need to have 1 of the main belts which are WBC WBO WBA and IBF. thats it. only those titles count towards calling yourself a champion of the weight division.
it isnt rocket science. IBO and ring mag are not major world titles.

that's fine, you're entitled to your own opinion, i just wanted to let you know that the claim of pac's 7 division world championship isn't about mere minor championships but about the ring/lineage titles (something which has alot more substance/credibility).

i'm not here to convince you either since i know you won't budge, but if anyone holds lineage/ring titles in high regard or on par with any major title, he shouldn't have any reason to not consider pac a 7 division world champion.

[razor.thin]

if hopkins was lineal light heavyweight champ then yes he is.

[Imhotep]

Its already clear ur a ***** moron.

So dont highlight it further.

We already know.

Don`t be mad that your fanatasies about pac being 7 division champ does`nt match reality.

[jdn]

well, i rather people call him a "4 weight lineal champion" rather than a 7 weight champion, but i doubt casual fans understand the concept of lineal belts and alphabet belts.

belts don't really mean that much. its the fighters that make the belt, not the other way around.

I rather people call him 7 weight champion. Makes him look better since casual fans don't understand the concept and 7 > 4. =)

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

Should I listen to internet Pacquiao haters or the experts who recongnize Pac as the 7 division champ?

Actually the boxing historians and experts are having a huge deate about where is 5 or 7!!!

[merjohn32]

well, i rather people call him a "4 weight lineal champion" rather than a 7 weight champion, but i doubt casual fans understand the concept of lineal belts and alphabet belts.

belts don't really mean that much. its the fighters that make the belt, not the other way around.

well, the alphabet beltss still have value especially in the lower weight divisions. At least from a monetary view point. For instance the WBC minimum weight or strawweight world title holder would earn much more money as compared to being a non title holder. In these cases, the belts give them a right to demand higher fight purses.

And they may mean big pay-off for the title holder. For instance, David Diaz would have never fought Pacquiao if he wasn't a title holder.

Most contenders also rise into the higher levels by claiming a title. So the belts still hold significance.


However, elite fighters like Pac, FMJ, Mosley etc.. have already built their names to a point that they no longer need the alphabet belts to earn money. Instead, some may view the belts s an added burden because of the sanctioning fees and the mandatory challengers.

[aether]

well, the alphabet beltss still have value especially in the lower weight divisions. At least from a monetary view point. For instance the WBC minimum weight or strawweight world title holder would earn much more money as compared to being a non title holder. In these cases, the belts give them a right to demand higher fight purses.

And they may mean big pay-off for the title holder. For instance, David Diaz would have never fought Pacquiao if he wasn't a title holder.

Most contenders also rise into the higher levels by claiming a title. So the belts still hold significance.


However, elite fighters like Pac, FMJ, Mosley etc.. have already built their names to a point that they no longer need the alphabet belts to earn money. Instead, some may view the belts s an added burden because of the sanctioning fees and the mandatory challengers.

i was saying that in terms of legacy, belts don't mean as much considering the fact there are several sanctioning bodies.

but your'e right. some fighters come to a point where they are above their title.